Kodak discontinuing T400CN, Portra BW400, introduces BW400CN

Discussion in 'Black and White' started by canon_eos_rules, Feb 12, 2004.

  1. Bad news for all you T400CN & Portra 400BW lovers: Kodak's
    discontinuing these films.

    Good news: Kodak's introducing Kodak Professional BW400CN, a new
    professional chromogenic B&W film designed for printing onto color

    BTW, say Happy 50th Birthday to Tri-X!
  2. I've used every version of Kodak's C-41 process chromogenic monochrome film in 35mm and 120 since they were introduced. When I see consistent results on paper, then I'll celebrate.

    I like these films in theory. In practice, they've often left something to be desired.

    Ilford has gotten it right more often.
  3. Also, while Kodak may be calling this the 50th Anniversary of Tri-X, I seem to recall that Kelly Flannigan's research showed the film came out a bit earlier. Perhaps he'll see this thread and comment or correct me.
  4. They say the date was November 1, 1954 in their press release.
  5. In response to the Tri-x question: This year will be the 50th anniversary for the introduction of Tri-x in 35mm and in roll film sizes. Tri-x sheet film, according to the article in Shutterbug, came out around 1940.
  6. For C-41 B&W negative film I find the Ilford XP2-Super superior to the Kodak for traditional wet printing. The orange mask of the Kodak makes the printing more difficult although possible. It was designed for ease on color paper. So their new version probably isn't going to be much better. On 8X10 prints I find the Ilford very similiar in appearance to Delta 400.
  7. I can see killing off the bland T400CN, but not sure what's up with Portra B/W.

    Might be Kodak is incorporating some Portra UC technology into the new emulsion since Portra B/W is behind the curve in that department.
  8. No doubt I'm in the minority - I think I'll miss this film. It's my favourite chromogenic. Regards, RJ
  9. Image taken on Kodak T400CN, full frame.

    Carl Zeiss 35mm f1.4
  10. [​IMG] Kodak Portra C-41 B&W
    RJ, you can get good prints with the Kodak C-41 just for me at least and others complain that it is more difficult. The exposure time on this one was at least twice the time of a similiar negative of the Ilford C-41. And it seems to take more attempts to get it right. BTW the print looks better than the scan here.
  11. The biggest difference between T400CN and XP2 that I found was XP2's ugly grain (or rather dye clouds) in dark or underexposed areas. While T400CN by nature also exhibits grain/dye clouds with insufficient exposure I found it far less disturbing. No problem in 120 but big difference in 35mm. Thanks for letting us know, I'll stock up a couple of rolls...
  12. So which one between the T400CN and the 400BW comes repackaged
    under this new name? Nice box design, by the way :)
  13. Sheet film Tri-X is in the 1940 Kodak dataguide.


  14. I just got back from PMA in Vegas, and was told by 2 Kodak people at 2 different times that the "new" BW400CN is really Portra C41 B&W, and that the T400CN is being dropped in favor of just the one new film. It will be sold under the Kodak Professional label. They gave out a TON of film at the show for free to guys like me. They also gave me some of the new 100UC (that's right, 100UC) and 400UC rolls, which I shot in Vegas and will process Monday AM.

    Don't fret losing Portra 400B&W, it is just a new box! (want me to scan the box and post it?)

    Have fun,

  15. My understanding is that T400CN is designed for the ability to print on "true" B/W
    paper, while Portra 400BW (as well as the new Kodak C41 film) is only designed for
    printing onto color paper. For me, that's a big loss -- and I'm not aware of any films
    available that can fill the hole left by T400 CN. Does anyone know of any? Anybody
    know why Kodak would go this route? (other than that they're crazy) -- there must be
    others out there who like the idea of a C-41 film they can make real B/W prints with,

    Bob Y.
  16. "My understanding is that T400CN is designed for the ability to print on "true" B/W paper..."


    That was the claim. In practice it didn't work out so well. I gave T400CN a fair shake and then gave up on it.

    Ilford's XP2 Super is a better C-41 process monochrome film for printing on conventional b&w paper.

    However I got excellent results from Kodak's medium format Portra-whatever chromogenic monochrome film. The prints, on color paper, were neutral and impossible to distinguish from a conventional b&w print. However, like XP2 Super, it's less suitable for most low contrast situations.
  17. I only just found this out when I wanted to buy some more T400CN and found it's no longer available. It's been a while since I last bought any! I was gutted. I love this film. It's certainly not the best if you want pure B&W prints on colour paper; it usually produces soft, glowing sepia tones which I find quite lovely for portraits of women and children. I don't like the effect in landscapes, nor, for that matter, most other subjects, but when printed on b&w paper it's capable of producing superb prints. I have my own darkroom, so I like that versatility. I can send it to a mail order lab and have the portraits with that distinctive TCN-on-colour-paper look which I want, and if I have subjects I want in true b&w on the same film, I'll print the ones I want in my darkroom.
    Can anyone tell me if there's another film which even remotely resembles an equivalent?

Share This Page